Americans United - U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishopshttps://au.org/tags/us-conference-catholic-bishops
enDiscrimination on the Taxpayer’s Dime? The Fight To Curtail the Overreach of RFRAhttps://au.org/media/in-the-news/discrimination-on-the-taxpayer-s-dime-the-fight-to-curtail-the-overreach-of-rfra
<div class="field field-name-field-news-source field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Religion Dispatches</div></div></div>Thu, 07 May 2015 15:31:11 +0000Simon Brown11111 at https://au.orghttps://au.org/media/in-the-news/discrimination-on-the-taxpayer-s-dime-the-fight-to-curtail-the-overreach-of-rfra#commentsThe Bishops’ Lament: Losing Tax Money And Losing Public Support https://au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/the-bishops-lament-losing-tax-money-and-losing-public-support
<a href="/about/people/rob-boston">Rob Boston</a><div class="field field-name-field-blog-type field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/blogs/wall-of-separation">Wall of Separation</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-callout field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Social services run by entities that don’t use them to deny people their basic human rights or foist their religion onto the unwilling! What is this world coming to?</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="prose"><p>The U.S. Catholic bishops met in New Orleans last week. I read <a href="http://ncronline.org/news/faith-parish/bishops-receive-stark-image-state-american-society">an account</a> of this meeting in the <em>National Catholic Reporter</em> last week, and two things struck me.</p><p>One, the bishops are really worried that they might lose the lucrative contracts they get from the federal government because of their increasingly out-of-step views on issues like LGBT rights and access to birth control.</p><p>A lot of people aren’t aware of this, but Catholic Charities basically would not exist if it were not for you the taxpayer. About 62 percent of the organization’s budget <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/29/us/for-bishops-a-battle-over-whose-rights-prevail.html?pagewanted=1&amp;_r=2">comes from government sources</a>.</p><p>Every now and then, a government official has the temerity to actually try to bring some accountability to that money. An elected official or a bureaucrat might mandate, for example, that employees at taxpayer-funded Catholic groups receive contraceptive coverage or that LGBT Americans be served alongside everyone else.</p><p>Helen Alvaré, a professor at George Mason University who advises church officials, carped that it is “getting difficult” for the church to work with the federal government “because of laws like a federal mandate requiring coverage of contraceptive services in health care plans.”</p><p>“We have always believed it has been eminently possible and good for us to partner with the public authority,” Alvaré said. “Part of me worries some [people] at some levels of government are beginning to imagine a charitable services world where we are not a partner.”</p><p>Imagine that – social services run by entities that don’t use them to deny people their basic human rights or foist their religion onto the unwilling! What is this world coming to?</p><p>It gets even more galling: <em>The Reporter</em> noted that Alvaré, whose talk focused on “the new evangelization and poverty,” suggested “that the U.S. bishops could better evangelize by emphasizing their work to serve those in need.”</p><p>So the bishops want to use their mostly tax-funded social service programs to evangelize those in need and draw them into the church. Does anyone else see a problem here?</p><p>The second thing that struck me is that the bishops are completely flummoxed by the evolving situation concerning same-sex marriage. You can sense their frustration – and even terror – as the polls turn against them.</p><p>W. Bradford Wilcox, a professor of sociology at the University of Virginia, talked to the bishops about marriage and its benefits. Wilcox pointed to research showing that children tend to do better when they come from stable homes with two parents present.</p><p>A couple of the bishops questioned Wilcox about same-sex marriage, which they seemed to assume is bad for children. To his credit, Wilcox noted that the research doesn’t back that up. Stability, he noted, is the key.</p><p>“Most of the scientists would say that there’s no difference… between a stable same-sex family and a stable heterosexual family,” Wilcox told the bishops.</p><p>He later added, “I think that the assumption…is that when same-sex marriage is legalized and it is given cultural support, it will be as stable as heterosexual marriage.”</p><p>When Bishop Joseph Tyson of Washington state asked if there was data to back that up, Wilcox replied, “The data suggest that same-sex couples – and this is really preliminary – are more likely to have stable relationships when the legal regime is more supportive of their relationships.”</p><p>So families do better when the government offers them support and values them? You don’t say! Somehow I’m thinking this was not the answer the bishops wanted to hear. (This is especially noteworthy because Wilcox <a href="http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/regnerus-study-backer-acknowledges-marriage-equality-creates-family-stability">has not exactly been a fan</a> of same-sex marriage in the past.)</p><p>I have no problem with these guys serving the poor and spreading their views about marriage (even though I disagree with those views). I just want them to understand that if their program involves evangelism, if it discriminates against people on the basis of who they love or if it interferes with the personal medical decisions of others, they shouldn’t expect one dime of taxpayer funding for it.</p><p>The bishops have consistently had problems grasping the idea that people who don’t agree with their theology (and their politics, which are increasingly jumbled together) might not want to subsidize their church. In fact, they seem to want to have the best of both worlds: They want all of the taxpayer money they can get with none of the government’s oversight and regulation.</p><p>Simple decency and evolving cultural attitudes in America are increasingly making that stance a non-starter.</p></div></div><div class="tags clearfix"><div class="field-label">Issues:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><span class="field-item"><a href="/issues/faith-based-initiative-government-funding-religious-social-service-providers">The Faith-Based Initiative &amp; Government Funding of Religious Social Service Providers</a></span></div></div><div class="tags clearfix"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/us-conference-catholic-bishops">U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/helen-alvare">Helen Alvare</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/w-bradford-wilcox">W. Bradford Wilcox</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/university-of-virginia">University of Virginia</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/george-mason-university">George Mason University</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/joseph-tyson">Joseph Tyson</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/national-catholic-reporter">National Catholic Reporter</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/same-sex-marriage">same-sex marriage</a></span></div></div>Mon, 16 Jun 2014 14:45:04 +0000Rob Boston10153 at https://au.orghttps://au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/the-bishops-lament-losing-tax-money-and-losing-public-support#commentsA Voucher By Any Other Name: Catholic Cardinal Supports ‘School Choice’ Scheme In New Yorkhttps://au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/a-voucher-by-any-other-name-catholic-cardinal-supports-school-choice-scheme
<a href="/about/people/simon-brown">Simon Brown</a><div class="field field-name-field-blog-type field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/blogs/wall-of-separation">Wall of Separation</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-callout field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">A voucher by any other name is still problematic. The bottom line is that the Catholic Church’s private school system is an arm of the church and is frequently used for evangelism and spreading church doctrine. Members of the church, not the taxpayers, should be responsible for bailing out Cardinal Dolan’s sectarian schools. </div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="prose"><p>Catholic schools have fallen on hard times nationwide, and now the most powerful bishop in the United States is hoping New York’s taxpayers will <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/18/nyregion/cardinal-dolan-heading-to-albany-to-push-for-education-tax-credit.html?ref=nyregion">bail out some of these ailing institutions</a>.</p><p><em>The New York Times</em> reports that Cardinal Timothy Dolan, archbishop of New York and head of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), is backing a plan that would give both individuals and corporations a tax credit for making contributions to public schools and/or “scholarship programs” that help low- and middle-income students attend private schools, even if those schools are religious.</p><p>Does that sound a lot like a voucher to you? That’s because it basically is. Convoluted tuition tax credit plans like this are an increasingly popular form of backdoor voucher. Just like a traditional voucher, they allow money to be taken away from public programs and handed over to religious schools.</p><p>Both the New York Assembly and Senate have their own versions of a tax credit plan. The two proposals do agree on at least one important point: individuals could receive no more than $1 million in tax credits per year, <em>The Times </em>said.</p><p>The total amount of donations would also be capped, but the range is from $50 million to $300 million annually, depending on the plan, the report said. </p><p>Lawmakers also disagree over whether or not charter schools should be included.</p><p>The proposal must pass before the state’s budget deadline of April 1, and even though this idea has been brought up unsuccessfully at least five times before, Dolan’s push could make a difference, given his influence in the state. </p><p>“Anything we can do to help education, to help our kids, we want to do it as vigorously as possible,” Dolan said last week, according to the <em>The Times</em>. “And I don’t know of a bill that does that better than the one that we’ve got now.”</p><p>Even though this bill would encourage donations to public schools as well as private schools, it’s safe to say that Dolan only wants the money going to one place: Catholic schools.</p><p>The Catholic hierarchy has long supported vouchers and similar plans, such as tuition tax credits, because its schools are running dangerously low on both students and funds. According to a 2011<em> Times</em><em> report</em>, <a href="https://au.org/church-state/december-2011-church-state/featured/pennsylvania-railroad">the number of Catholic schools in the United States</a> has fallen from 13,000 to 7,000 over the past 50 years. The number of students attending Catholic schools has subsequently decreased from about five million to about two million.</p><p>Although 34 Catholic schools opened nationwide in the 2010-2011 school year, 172 closed, <em>The Times </em>said.</p><p>Given that grim reality, Dolan doesn’t just want taxpayer money for religious schools – he’s practically desperate for it.</p><p>Assemblyman Michael Cusick (D-Staten Island), who sponsored a version of the tax credit bill, said he is optimistic it will pass this year. But Sheldon Silver (D-Manhattan), longtime speaker of the state Assembly, seemed wary of the scheme.</p><p>“I am sympathetic to alleviating the costs for parents,” Silver said. “But the way to do that is through existing channels and not through a method that would allow tax dollars to be diverted away from critical needs.”</p><p>Matthew Wing, a spokesman for Gov. Andrew Cuomo, told <em>The Times</em> that Cuomo had not yet decided whether to support any version of the tax credits.</p><p>Should the tax credit plan become law, its fate in court is unclear. Back in 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court <a href="http://azstarnet.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/supreme-court-tosses-out-tuition-tax-credit-lawsuit/article_14cb4804-69c2-53ae-b2f7-c1b303ba4829.html">tossed a case</a> over Arizona’s tax credit program, which grants dollar-for-dollar credits for donations to “scholarship” organizations, on standing. The high court never considered the merits of the case.</p><p><a href="http://ciep.hunter.cuny.edu/education-tax-credits-care/">Some have argued</a>, however, that Arizona’s program (and others like it) is constitutional because it does not directly take tax revenue away from public education and hand it over to religious schools. The programs merely take money that the state never actually had in its coffers and direct it elsewhere, proponents say.</p><p>But it’s hard to see how that is fundamentally different from regular voucher schemes, since the state is still giving up money intended for public use that it otherwise would have received – but that’s their argument.</p><p>Given that murky legal future, it’s important that Dolan not be allowed to have his way with New York’s tax code. It’s bad policy from both a fiscal standpoint and a church-state perspective.</p><p>A voucher by any other name is still problematic. The bottom line is that the Catholic Church’s private school system is an arm of the church and is frequently used for evangelism and spreading church doctrine. Members of the church, not the taxpayers, should be responsible for bailing out Dolan’s sectarian schools.</p><p>If the Catholic hierarchy can’t find a way to support its school system from within its own flock, maybe there’s a message there for Dolan: saving these schools isn’t a priority for the church’s membership. The majority of them, after all, happily rely on public schools.<strong> </strong></p></div></div><div class="tags clearfix"><div class="field-label">Issues:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><span class="field-item"><a href="/issues/vouchers">Vouchers</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/issues/tuition-tax-credits-and-deductions">Tuition Tax Credits and Deductions</a></span></div></div><div class="tags clearfix"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/cardinal-timothy-dolan">Cardinal Timothy Dolan</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/us-conference-catholic-bishops">U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/sheldon-silver">Sheldon Silver</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/andrew-cuomo">Andrew Cuomo</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/michael-cusick">Michael Cusick</a></span></div></div><div class="tags clearfix"><div class="field-label">Location:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><span class="field-item"><a href="/our-work/grassroots/new-york-0">New York</a></span></div></div>Thu, 20 Mar 2014 14:47:28 +0000Simon Brown9744 at https://au.orghttps://au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/a-voucher-by-any-other-name-catholic-cardinal-supports-school-choice-scheme#commentsPersecution Complex: Catholic Hierarchy, Religious Right Continue Heated Attack On Birth Control Mandatehttps://au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/persecution-complex-catholic-hierarchy-religious-right-continue-heated
<a href="/about/people/simon-brown">Simon Brown</a><div class="field field-name-field-blog-type field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/blogs/wall-of-separation">Wall of Separation</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-callout field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">These folks want to impose their theological views about birth control on other Americans who may not share those views.</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="prose"><p>A claim that someone is being persecuted by a government is not something to be taken lightly, but that accusation rings hollow when it comes to the Roman Catholic hierarchy and Religious Right’s fight for exemption from the Obama administration’s birth control mandate.</p><p>Last week, <a href="http://www.cardinalnewmansociety.org/Portals/0/CENTER/Final%20ADF-CNS_comment_on_NPRM%2004%2005%2013.pdf">a group of 22 Catholic educational organizations sent comments</a> to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to express concern “about the illegal violations of religious freedom” that supposedly stem from the Obama administration’s implementation of the Affordable Care Act (ACA).</p><p>Under HHS regulations, most employers are expected to offer a health care policy that includes access to birth control at no cost to the employee. Houses of worship are exempt from the requirement, and employees at religiously affiliated entities such as church schools and hospitals will get contraceptive coverage from third-party insurers. Their employers won’t have to pay for it.</p><p>The most recent proposed accommodations were announced in February, and at that time HHS asked for additional comments, which were due this week.</p><p>In response to that request, the 22 Catholic colleges and universities sent a letter drafted by the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), a Religious Right legal outfit founded by radio and television preachers, that rejected the latest compromise. The proposed accommodation, the schools said, “illegally require[s] religious objectors to issue health plans that cause coverage of ‘contraception.’”</p><p>The ADF-composed letter even called the contraceptive mandate an unprecedented violation of religious liberty.</p><p>“No other federal rule has so narrowly and discriminatorily defined what it means to exercise religious conscience, and no regulation has ever so directly violated plain statutory and constitutional religious freedoms,” the letter said. </p><p>Others, like the Knights of Columbus, a Catholic fraternal organization, <a href="http://www.kofc.org/un/en/resources/communications/tanner_letter.pdf">made similar charges</a>. And back in March, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops <a href="http://www.ilcatholic.org/usccb-revised-hhs-mandate-violates-religious-freedom/ http://bpnews.net/BPnews.asp?ID=40042">weighed in</a>, listing five objections to the contraceptive mandate. The points followed a predictable theme: the mandate supposedly infringes on religious freedom.</p><p>Harsh as those accusations were, others went even further. The Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics &amp; Religious Liberty Commission (ERLC) <a href="http://erlc.com/documents/pdf/20130408-ltr-hhs-erlc-comment.pdf">said in an April 8 comment that the mandate amounts to persecution</a>.</p><p>“Through its mandate, HHS is abusing the authority of the federal government by forcing believers to choose between either offending their God and violating their consciences or facing crushing fines and possible imprisonment for adhering to their deeply held moral convictions,” said Richard Land, outgoing president of the ERLC. “This is, by definition, a form of religious persecution.”</p><p>This claim completely mischaracterizes the issue and is blatantly false. Land should know better, but this kind of attack is sort of his thing. </p><p>What’s the bottom line here? It’s this: These folks want to impose their theological views about birth control on other Americans who may not share those views.</p><p>In part to combat the misinformation coming from those who oppose birth control access, Americans United <a href="https://www.au.org/files/pdf_documents/2013-03-04_PrevServACA-AUcomments.pdf">sent a letter of its own</a> to HHS on April 8. AU rejected all of the claims by the Catholic hierarchy and Religious Right, while also encouraging the Obama administration not to back down.</p><p>“In the end, the provision of a comprehensive set of health-care benefits is really no different than the provision of a paycheck; employees are free to utilize both kinds of benefits in any manner that they wish, and the employer cannot reasonably be perceived to support or endorse any particular use thereof,” asserted AU in the comments. “Thus, the requirement that entities include insurance coverage for contraceptives as part of group insurance plans places no substantial burden on the employer.”</p><p>AU also noted that the exemption for religious organizations and their affiliates surpasses what the U.S. Constitution requires.</p><p>“The current exemption and accommodation far surpass necessity, and the Administration should reject further arguments to extend them,” AU said.</p><p><a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/apr/8/free-birth-control-rules-to-be-finalized/">HHS is now working to finalize the rules on the contraceptive mandate</a>, which HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said will take effect Aug. 1.</p><p>“As of Aug. 1, 2013, every employee who doesn’t work directly for a church or a diocese will be included in the benefit package,” she said, according to the <em>Washington Times</em>.</p><p>If Sebelius and her colleagues are in tune with public opinion, no further accommodations will be made. LifeWay Research, which is the research arm of Land’s Southern Baptist Convention, found that <a href="http://www.lifeway.com/ArticleView?storeId=10054&amp;catalogId=10001&amp;langId=-1&amp;article=research-majority-americans-support-mandatory-obamacare-contraception-coverage">63 percent of adults say</a> “businesses should be required to provide their employees with free contraception and birth control, even if it runs counter to the owners’ religious principles.”</p><p>This issue has<a href="http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/obama-administration-to-begin-finalizing-hhs-mandate-rules-today"> generated quite a bit of comment from all sides</a>, and it’s likely that the matter won’t be settled until the U.S. Supreme Court decides it. But one thing should be clear – no one is being persecuted here.</p><p>Ultimately, access to birth control is a personal decision to be made by individuals, as AU Executive Director Barry W. Lynn noted in a recent media statement.</p><p>“Americans want and deserve access to safe and affordable birth control,” he said. “Put simply, the decision to use contraceptives is a personal matter and should be governed by the individual, not powerful sectarian lobbies.”</p></div></div><div class="tags clearfix"><div class="field-label">Issues:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><span class="field-item"><a href="/issues/reproductive-health-conscience-clauses-for-religious-objectors">Reproductive Health &amp; Conscience Clauses for Religious Objectors</a></span></div></div><div class="tags clearfix"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/kathleen-sebelius">Kathleen Sebelius</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/us-department-of-health-and-human-services">U.S. Department of Health and Human Services</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/us-conference-catholic-bishops">U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/alliance-defending-freedom">Alliance Defending Freedom</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/southern-baptist-convention">Southern Baptist Convention</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/knights-of-columbus">Knights of Columbus</a></span></div></div>Wed, 10 Apr 2013 17:20:14 +0000Simon Brown8275 at https://au.orghttps://au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/persecution-complex-catholic-hierarchy-religious-right-continue-heated#commentsBackdoor Maneuver: Crafty Bishops Try To Repeal Birth Control Mandatehttps://au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/backdoor-maneuver-crafty-bishops-try-to-repeal-birth-control-mandate
<a href="/about/people/simon-brown">Simon Brown</a><div class="field field-name-field-blog-type field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/blogs/wall-of-separation">Wall of Separation</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-callout field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">The Catholic hierarchy will fight until the very end to limit the access Americans have to contraceptives, and now it’s apparent that leaders like Timothy Dolan have no problem presenting a misleading public relations campaign to further their goals.</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="prose"><p>When Pope Francis <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/20/world/europe/installation-of-pope-francis.html?_r=0">made his first official address this week</a>, he called upon his followers to serve the “poorest, weakest” of the world. If the activities of the bishops in the United States are any indication, however, that call could go unanswered.</p><p>Cardinal Timothy Dolan, archbishop of New York and head of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, was asked yesterday by Today Show host Matt Lauer if women “have reason to be hopeful” now that Francis is in charge.</p><p><a href="http://www.today.com/video/today/51238102#51238102">Dolan responded</a>: “We all have reason to be hopeful with Pope Francis. My hope is on steroids.”</p><p>Dolan went on to explain that “women are pros when it comes to tender love” and he wouldn’t be surprised if women “had a more accented role in [Francis’] papacy.”</p><p>Meanwhile, however, Dolan’s lobbying team has been hard at work trying to repeal a U.S. law that is not only good for women, but everyone: the Obama administration’s mandate that requires most employers to offer health insurance plans that include free coverage for contraceptives.</p><p>CNS News, a right-wing news service,<a href="http://cnsnews.com/news/article/catholic-bishops-gop-house-repeal-obamacare-reg-cr-or-other-must-pass-bill"> reported that the bishops are pressuring the U.S. House of Representatives to repeal the birth control insurance mandate</a>. In a March 8 letter sent to every House member, Cardinal Sean O’Malley, archbishop of Boston, said the House should sneak the repeal measure into some sort of “must-pass” legislation such as a continuing resolution that would be necessary to keep the federal government funded for the next fiscal year. That way, the U.S. Senate and President Barack Obama would be forced to let it pass.</p><p>“Providers of health care, as well as those who offer or purchase insurance, should not face an unacceptable choice between preserving their religious and moral integrity or participating in our health care system,” O’Malley said in his letter</p><p>The House and Senate are both currently working to pass continuing resolutions to fund the federal government. An attempt to add the repeal language could take place this week.</p><p>But when House Republican leaders called an initial floor vote on their version of the continuing resolution, it did not include the language that Archbishop William E. Lori asked for back in February that would permanently repeal the birth control mandate, CNS reported.</p><p>There’s also another problem facing the bishops: House Republicans<a href="http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/fieldclinic/Republicans-Vote-to-Repeal-Obamacare--Again-and-Again.html"> have tried and tried and tried</a> to repeal part or all of the Obama administration’s new health care laws. They’ve tried 33 times, in fact. Thirty-three times those measures have died upon arrival in the U.S. Senate.</p><p>This all shows that the Catholic hierarchy will fight until the very end to limit the access Americans have to contraceptives, and now it’s apparent that leaders like Dolan have no problem presenting a misleading public relations campaign, saying the Catholic hierarchy may give women a more active role while simultaneously working to restrict women’s rights.</p><p>It would be wonderful if Pope Francis could help lead the Catholic hierarchy in a new direction on many issues, and it’s certainly possible that he will. But in the meantime, we must make sure that Dolan and his cohorts don’t succeed in passing legislation that harms the health care of women and indeed all Americans. </p></div></div><div class="tags clearfix"><div class="field-label">Issues:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><span class="field-item"><a href="/issues/reproductive-health-conscience-clauses-for-religious-objectors">Reproductive Health &amp; Conscience Clauses for Religious Objectors</a></span></div></div><div class="tags clearfix"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/cardinal-timothy-dolan">Cardinal Timothy Dolan</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/cardinal-sean-omalley">Cardinal Sean O&#039;Malley</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/pope-francis">Pope Francis</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/us-conference-catholic-bishops">U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops</a></span></div></div>Wed, 20 Mar 2013 18:27:43 +0000Simon Brown8148 at https://au.orghttps://au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/backdoor-maneuver-crafty-bishops-try-to-repeal-birth-control-mandate#commentsContrary Clerics: Bishops Reject Latest Obama Olive Branch On Contraceptives https://au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/contrary-clerics-bishops-reject-latest-obama-olive-branch-on-contraceptives
<a href="/about/people/rob-boston">Rob Boston</a><div class="field field-name-field-blog-type field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/blogs/wall-of-separation">Wall of Separation</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-callout field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">The Catholic bishops simply don’t want Americans to have access to birth control. They consider its use a sin, and their most recent statement shows that they’re not open to reasonable compromise</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="prose"><p>Yesterday the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops issued a<a href="http://www.usccb.org/news/2013/13-037.cfm"> formal statement</a> reacting to the Obama administration’s latest effort at compromise on birth control. To no one’s surprise, the bishops rejected the proposal.</p><p>As you might recall, federal regulations have been issued under the Affordable Care Act concerning what the types of coverage that health care plans must include. Contraceptives are, of course, on the list.</p><p>Houses of worship and seminaries are exempt from the mandate, but that’s not good enough for the bishops. They insist that all religiously affiliated institutions such as hospitals and colleges have the right to deny contraceptive coverage to workers. They also want corporations and other for-profit enterprises to be exempt if they are owned by Catholics or members of other religious traditions that oppose birth control.</p><p>Obama and officials at the Department of Health and Human Services recently issued a proposed new rule to try to resolve this matter. Businesses would still have to comply with mandate, but religiously affiliated institutions would not.</p><p>Under the plan, employees of church hospitals and colleges would have access to contraception, with insurance companies picking up the tab. The insurance companies would do the work of notifying employees of religiously affiliated institutions that they are eligible under a separate, individual policy – one that is provided wholly by the insurance company. (This won’t cost the insurance companies extra. They’ll actually save money because they’ll have to pay for fewer births.)</p><p>Syndicated columnist E.J. Dionne, himself a devout Catholic, <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/ej-dionne-catholic-church-wins-on-contraception-coverage/2013/02/01/94a3eb80-6cb0-11e2-bd36-c0fe61a205f6_story.html">endorsed the idea</a>. <em>The Washington Post</em>’s editorial board, which has been critical of Obama over this issue, <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/respecting-religious-exemptions/2012/01/22/gIQA0ZESJQ_story.html">backed it as well</a>.</p><p>Even William Donohue, the acerbic head of the far-right Catholic League for Religious and Civil Right, <a href="http://www.catholicleague.org/new-hhs-rules-welcomed/">seemed OK</a> with this compromise (although Donohue later <a href="http://www.catholicleague.org/bishops-respond-to-new-hhs-rules/">stepped back</a> from that a bit).</p><p>Several Catholic organizations and leaders <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013/02/02/1529501/catholic-leaders-obamacare-rule/">applauded the proposed rule</a>. Among them is the Rev. Thomas Reese, senior fellow at Georgetown University’s Woodstock Theological Center and a Jesuit priest.</p><p><strong>“</strong>HHS and the administration have gone out of their way to resolve the concerns of religious institutions that object to covering contraceptives in their insurance programs,” Reese said.</p><p>None of this mattered to the bishops.</p><p>In a statement, Cardinal Timothy Dolan of New York City said, “Throughout the past year, we have been assured by the Administration that we will not have to refer, pay for, or negotiate for the mandated coverage. We remain eager for the Administration to fulfill that pledge and to find acceptable solutions—we will affirm any genuine progress that is made, and we will redouble our efforts to overcome obstacles or setbacks.</p><p>I have to wonder if Dolan actually read the proposed new rule. Remember, the church itself is wholly exempt. And church-affiliated entities will not have to pay for birth control, nor will they be required to give any referrals for it. The insurance companies will take care of that.</p><p>The bishops’ response is especially galling when one remembers that church hospitals, colleges and social services agencies receive massive infusions of taxpayer money, hire plenty of non-Catholics and offer their services to the public. They seem to want the right to claim to be quasi-secular when they’re raiding the public purse and then shift to wholly sectarian when resisting any government regulation they dislike.</p><p>As I said <a href="https://www.au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/new-round-old-fight-why-the-religious-right-rejects-the-obama-compromise">earlier this week</a>, the bishops simply don’t want Americans to have access to birth control. They consider its use a sin, and their most recent statement shows that they’re not open to reasonable compromise.</p><p>Thanks to their Dark Ages mentality, the country will be stuck with a protracted battle in court and maybe Congress over an issue that to the vast majority of Americans was laid to rest a long time ago.</p><p>Be assured that Americans United will stay involved. We’ve already filed <a href="http://www.au.org/files/pdf_documents/NewlandAmicus_AU-2013.pdf">legal briefs</a> in some pending cases and will keep an eye on developments on Capitol Hill as well.</p><p>The health care of Americans must never be held hostage to the demands of aggressive sectarian lobbies.</p></div></div><div class="tags clearfix"><div class="field-label">Issues:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><span class="field-item"><a href="/issues/reproductive-health-conscience-clauses-for-religious-objectors">Reproductive Health &amp; Conscience Clauses for Religious Objectors</a></span></div></div><div class="tags clearfix"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/us-conference-catholic-bishops">U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/cardinal-timothy-dolan">Cardinal Timothy Dolan</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/birth-control">birth control</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/willliam-donohue">Willliam Donohue</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/catholic-league-religious-and-civil-rights">Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/thomas-reese">Thomas Reese</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/ej-dionne">E.J. Dionne</a></span></div></div>Fri, 08 Feb 2013 17:16:03 +0000Rob Boston8032 at https://au.orghttps://au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/contrary-clerics-bishops-reject-latest-obama-olive-branch-on-contraceptives#commentsNew Round, Old Fight: Why The Religious Right Rejects The Obama Compromise Over Birth Controlhttps://au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/new-round-old-fight-why-the-religious-right-rejects-the-obama-compromise
<a href="/about/people/rob-boston">Rob Boston</a><div class="field field-name-field-blog-type field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/blogs/wall-of-separation">Wall of Separation</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-callout field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"> No matter what the Obama administration does on contraceptive access, far-right religious groups are never satisfied.</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="prose"><p>I continue to be amazed that in the year 2013 our nation continues to grapple with the issue of access to contraceptives, a matter most advanced nations laid to rest long ago.</p><p>On Friday, the Obama administration made another attempt to address the concerns of conservative religious employers who say they don’t want to provide birth control for employees. Once again, it’s not going well.</p><p>A little history: When the Affordable Care Act was passed, it contained provisions allowing the administration to issue regulations concerning what type of health care coverage employers would be required to offer. Contraceptives are included in the baseline care package because so many Americans use birth control, and it plays an important role in preventative care. (Plus, it has medicinal uses.)</p><p>Under the original proposal, houses of worship were exempt from the requirement to include birth control coverage. But religiously affiliated nonprofits such as colleges and hospitals – that hire people of many faiths, serve the general public and often are government-subsidized – were required to provide insurance plans that included contraception. Businesses and other for-profit enterprises were required to do as well.</p><p>The Catholic bishops and the Religious Right responded to this arrangement by filing a <a href="https://www.au.org/church-state/february-2013-church-state/featured/conscience-contraception-and-the-court">slew of lawsuits</a>.</p><p>On Friday, the administration offered the details of a compromise. The proposed new rule makes sure employees at religious nonprofits have access to birth control but provides an additional buffer between the church-related institutions and contraceptive coverage. Insurance companies would pick up the tab for contraception and would do the work of notifying employees of religiously affiliated institutions that they are eligible under a separate, individual policy – one that is provided wholly by the insurance company.</p><p>That’s still not good enough for some on the right. The<a href="http://www.becketfund.org/hhsannouncement1/"> Becket Fund for Religious Liberty</a>, the <a href="http://www.frc.org/newsroom/updated-hhs-mandate-continues-attack-on-religious-freedom">Family Research Council</a> and several anti-abortion groups promptly attacked the new proposal.</p><p>The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops has yet to weigh in yet. The bishops say they are studying the proposal. <em>Washington Post</em> columnist E.J. Dionne is hopeful that the church hierarchy will <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/ej-dionne-catholic-church-wins-on-contraception-coverage/2013/02/01/94a3eb80-6cb0-11e2-bd36-c0fe61a205f6_story.html">accept the plan</a> and let the nation move on.</p><p>I’m less optimistic.</p><p>The fact is, the administration is bending over backwards to appease these religious groups. Obama and officials at the Department of Health and Human Services have gone out of their way to make sure that aggressive sectarian lobbies aren’t offended by something that has never been any of these clerics’ business: whether people choose to use birth control.</p><p>Yet no matter what the Obama team does, these far-right religious groups are never satisfied.</p><p>We need to take a step back and take a deeper look at what’s really going on here. As I noted in <a href="https://www.au.org/church-state/may-2012-church-state/featured/sex-sects-and-the-battle-over-contraception">a story </a>I wrote about this issue last year, the bishops, aided by some allies in the fundamentalist Protestant community, have long opposed birth control. (Most fundamentalists don’t oppose all contraceptives, but do single out some kinds they consider to be “abortifacients.”)</p><p>Prior to 1965, these groups were powerful enough to put laws in place in some states banning the sale and distribution of contraceptives – for <em>anyone</em>, even married couples. The Supreme Court struck these measures down (as they applied to married couples) in a landmark ruling called <a href="http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1964/1964_496"><em>Griswold v. Connecticut</em>.</a></p><p>Religious zealots are still fighting the issues raised by <em>Griswold</em>. They lost that case badly – and certainly they’ve lost in the court of public opinion since then – but the health care battle gave them new life, and they <a href="http://www.theatlanticwire.com/national/2013/02/birth-control-compromise-religious-right/61717/">ran with it</a>.</p><p>An issue that had been dormant for many years suddenly sprang to life. It’s now being seriously argued that an individual’s private decision to use birth control somehow offends the alleged religious liberty rights – and the “conscience” – of giant corporations. The most amazing thing about this argument is that some courts are taking it seriously.</p><p>The Obama administration went out of its way to work out a compromise in this area. It went beyond what the Constitution requires. But now the time has come to realize that there can be no “compromise” with zealots who pine not just for the 1950s but the 1350s.</p><p>The administration’s stated goal is a policy that allows as many Americans as possible to get and use safe and effective forms of birth control. The goal of groups like Becket, the FRC and the strident anti-abortion groups is the opposite: to deny access to as many Americans as possible because they consider use of birth control a sin, and they’ve yet to come to grips with the social changes that have occurred since birth control became widely available in the 1960s.</p><p>There is no common ground here. It’s time to ask a hard question: Why is the administration even listening to, yet along trying to appease, these forces?</p></div></div><div class="tags clearfix"><div class="field-label">Issues:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><span class="field-item"><a href="/issues/reproductive-health-conscience-clauses-for-religious-objectors">Reproductive Health &amp; Conscience Clauses for Religious Objectors</a></span></div></div><div class="tags clearfix"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/birth-control">birth control</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/becket-fund-for-religious-liberty">Becket Fund for Religious Liberty</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/family-research-council">Family Research Council</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/affordable-care-act">Affordable Care Act</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/president-barack-obama">President Barack Obama</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/ej-dionne">E.J. Dionne</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/us-conference-catholic-bishops">U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops</a></span></div></div>Mon, 04 Feb 2013 18:54:51 +0000Rob Boston8026 at https://au.orghttps://au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/new-round-old-fight-why-the-religious-right-rejects-the-obama-compromise#commentsSeven Days Of Deception: TGIF, ‘School Choice Week’ Is Just About Overhttps://au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/seven-days-of-deception-tgif-school-choice-week-is-just-about-over
<a href="/about/people/joseph-l-conn">Joseph L. Conn</a><div class="field field-name-field-blog-type field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/blogs/wall-of-separation">Wall of Separation</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-callout field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">If you think the Heritage Foundation, the Koch Brothers and Betsy DeVos are in this just to help to some poor kid in the inner city, they’ve got a privatized bridge in Brooklyn they want to sell you.
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="prose"><p>“National School Choice Week” is winding down, and we’ve been treated to an avalanche of propaganda for vouchers, neo-vouchers and other expressions of so-called “educational choice.”</p><p>It’s all a lie, of course. This is not about “choice.” It’s about funding religious and other private schools with taxpayer dollars and ultimately destroying the public school system.</p><p>If you think the Heritage Foundation, the <a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/01/24/the_ugly_truth_about_school_choice/">Koch Brothers </a>and <a href="https://au.org/church-state/september-2010-church-state/featured/sneak-attack">Betsy DeVos </a>are in this just to help to some poor kid in the inner city, they’ve got a privatized bridge in Brooklyn they want to sell you.</p><p>Fortunately, Americans United and other advocates of public schools and church-state separation have been spreading an alternative message: School vouchers are a constitutional and public policy disaster.</p><p>AU has waged a Twitter<a href="https://twitter.com/americansunited"> campaign</a> this week to expose the voucher forces’ prevarications. And we’ve put up a <a href="https://au.org/voucherFAIL">special webpage</a> to outline the facts about vouchers. (We have a t<a href="http://voucherfail.tumblr.com/">umblr page</a> you might enjoy as well.)</p><p>Others are weighing in, too.</p><p>* Journalist Barbara J. Miner says vouchers in Milwaukee have been <a href="http://gazettextra.com/news/2013/jan/27/say-no-expanding-school-vouchers/">“an educational policy disaster.”</a></p><p>* The Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law says vouchers<a href="http://www.enewspf.com/opinion/commentary/40013-lawyers-committee-statement-on-national-school-choice-week.html"> undercut civil rights </a>and “violate the promise of equality.”</p><p>* Anti-creationism crusader Zack Kopplin says vouchers subsidize private religious <a href="http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/01/16/creationism-spreading-in-schools-thanks-to-vouchers/">schools that teach fundamentalist doctrines</a> instead of sound science.</p><p>* Patrick Elliott, a staff attorney with the Freedom From Religion Foundation, says voucher-subsidized private schools in Milwaukee <a href="http://www.jsonline.com/news/opinion/school-vouchers-harm-public-education-gs8ijgm-189279981.html">indoctrinate children in religious beliefs </a>but often offer poor academic instruction. Clara Mohammed School, for example, takes children on a “Qu’ran-guided journey” but fails to take them anywhere else. “It is funded,” says Elliott, “almost exclusively through vouchers. In 2011, only 0.8% of its students –1 out of 123 – tested proficient in math and 5.7% tested proficient in reading on state exams.”</p><p>* Sectarian lobbies frankly admit that religious schools exist to evangelize, but they still want massive taxpayer funding. The National Catholic Educational Association is a major backer of “School Choice Week,” while the bishops remind us that parochial schools are key components of the hierarchy’s indoctrination efforts. Bishop Joseph P. McFadden, chairman of the bishops’ Committee on Catholic Education, <a href="http://www.usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachings/how-we-teach/catholic-education/catholic-schools-week-parents-choice-for-the-new-evangelization.cfm">says Catholic schools offer</a> “a challenging education in an atmosphere where Jesus Christ is the center.” He calls Catholic schools “centers for the New Evangelization.”</p><p>Folks, we are in a real crisis here. Wealthy right-wing interest groups and sectarian lobbies are waging an all-out war on public schools. They want to destroy the public school system and move to a market-driven system where taxpayers are forced to support religious and other private schools of all sorts.</p><p>Major voucher campaigns are under way in Tennessee, Texas, Indiana, Wisconsin, Maine, Mississippi, Alaska and many other state legislatures. Just as ominous, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) is planning to roll out a national school voucher proposal in Congress.</p><p>This is serious business. If you care about church-state separation and strong public schools, <a href="https://au.org/donate/donate-now">join Americans United</a> and <a href="https://au.org/our-work/legislative/action-center">get active </a>NOW!</p></div></div><div class="tags clearfix"><div class="field-label">Issues:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><span class="field-item"><a href="/issues/vouchers">Vouchers</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/issues/tuition-tax-credits-and-deductions">Tuition Tax Credits and Deductions</a></span></div></div><div class="tags clearfix"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/school-choice-week">School Choice Week</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/heritage-foundation">Heritage Foundation</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/koch-brothers">Koch brothers</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/betsy-devos">Betsy DeVos</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/us-conference-catholic-bishops">U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops</a></span></div></div>Fri, 01 Feb 2013 17:11:40 +0000Joseph L. Conn7983 at https://au.orghttps://au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/seven-days-of-deception-tgif-school-choice-week-is-just-about-over#commentsBishops Behaving Badly: Catholic Prelates Preach Partisan Politicshttps://au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/bishops-behaving-badly-catholic-prelates-preach-partisan-politics
<a href="/about/people/rob-boston">Rob Boston</a><div class="field field-name-field-blog-type field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/blogs/wall-of-separation">Wall of Separation</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-callout field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Vote the wrong way, go to hell, says Illinois bishop. </div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="prose"><p>Let’s say someone told you that voting for a certain candidate would be an “evil” act and that by casting your ballot for this candidate, you would in fact be furthering the cause of evil.</p><p>You would probably get the impression that the person who made these remarks was telling you not to vote for that candidate, right?</p><p>Meet Bishop Thomas John Paprocki of Springfield, Ill. He doesn’t think you should vote for President Barack Obama. He keeps saying it’s not his job to tell you how to vote -- but he’s quick to add that a vote for Obama (and indeed any Democrat) furthers “intrinsic evils.”</p><p>Paprocki <a href="http://ct.dio.org/bishops-column/59-think-and-pray-about-your-vote-in-upcoming-election/text.html">discourses on this issue at length</a> in the diocesan newspaper <em>Catholic Times</em>. He notes that the Democrats support many “evils” – mainly legal abortion and same-sex marriage. He points out that there are some positive items in the Democratic platform but quickly adds that other planks “explicitly endorse intrinsic evils.”</p><p>What about the Republicans? Good news! Paprocki has examined their platform, and concludes, “[T]here is nothing in it that supports or promotes an intrinsic evil or a serious sin.”</p><p>Wait a minute. The GOP supports the death penalty, which the church has historically opposed. Isn’t that a problem? Nope, says Paprocki. It turns out the church doesn’t really oppose it in all cases.</p><p>But what about the Republicans’ stand on aid to the poor and those in need? You might recall that some nuns <a href="http://nunsonthebus.com/">chartered a bus</a> and took it across the county to highlight Catholic teaching in this area.</p><p>Well, those nuns are all wet, according to Paprocki. The GOP just has “different methods” for assisting those in need. There’s nothing evil about those methods, so it’s no biggie.</p><p>In case anyone fails to get the message, Paprocki concludes by pointing out that if you vote for candidates who promote evil, there’s a good chance you’ll go straight to hell.</p><p>“Again, I am not telling you which party or which candidates to vote for or against, but I am saying that you need to think and pray very carefully about your vote, because a vote for a candidate who promotes actions or behaviors that are intrinsically evil and gravely sinful makes you morally complicit and places the eternal salvation of your own soul in serious jeopardy,” Paprocki writes.</p><p>Of course Paprocki’s not telling you who to vote for! He’s just helpfully pointing out that if you vote for Democrats, you are furthering the cause of evil and ensuring that you’ll spend eternity being tormented in hell. How could anyone perceive that as political intervention?</p><p>The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) produces a <a href="http://www.usccb.org/about/general-counsel/political-activity-guidelines.cfm#political_campaign_activity_prohibition">guide to political activity</a>. It takes a pretty hard line and notes that the Internal Revenue Service prohibits “a range of activities, generally including: statements, in any medium, of support or opposition for any candidate, political party or political action committee….”</p><p>Perhaps the USCCB should send someone out to Springfield to read the document to Paprocki.</p><p>That person might then want to move on to New Jersey, where Newark Archbishop John J. Myers has also gone around the bend. Myers has <a href="http://www.northjersey.com/community/religion/Newark_archbishop_urges_voters_to_defend_marriage_life.html?c=y&amp;page=1">issued a statement </a>on same-sex marriage and abortion that goes so far as to instruct Catholics who disagree with church teachings on marriage to refrain from receiving communion.</p><p>Myers denied that the statement has anything to do with the election and tried to argue, with a straight face, that he released it now – a little more than a month before the election – just because, well, he felt like it. (Just for the record: Four states will vote on marriage equality this November. New Jersey isn’t one of them.)</p><p>If the Internal Revenue Service and the USCCB won’t crack on these politically partisan preachers, that leaves only one avenue: members of the church will have to speak up and make it clear that they don’t necessarily need, want or appreciate the hierarchy’s commands about how to behave in the voting booth.</p><p>Congregants appear to be doing so. <a href="http://www.religionnews.com/politics/election/poll-obama-surges-ahead-among-catholic-voters">A poll</a> issued yesterday by the Pew Forum showed Obama’s support among Catholics soaring. Among church members, he now leads Mitt Romney by 15 points.</p><p>P.S. Just a reminder: You can stand up for separation of church and state this weekend at a Voices United concert. Check out the line-up <a href="http://www.voicesunitedconcerts.com/">here</a>.</p></div></div><div class="tags clearfix"><div class="field-label">Issues:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><span class="field-item"><a href="/issues/religious-groups%E2%80%99-involvement-in-candidate-elections">Religious Groups’ Involvement in Candidate Elections</a></span></div></div><div class="tags clearfix"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/thomas-john-paprocki">Thomas John Paprocki</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/john-j-myers">John J. Myers</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/us-conference-catholic-bishops">U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/nuns-on-the-bus">nuns on the bus</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/internal-revenue-service-irs">Internal Revenue Service (IRS)</a></span></div></div>Thu, 27 Sep 2012 15:02:41 +0000Rob Boston7573 at https://au.orghttps://au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/bishops-behaving-badly-catholic-prelates-preach-partisan-politics#commentsPew Ado: Catholic Leaders Endorse Candidates Despite Growing Flock Objectionshttps://au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/pew-ado-catholic-leaders-endorse-candidates-despite-growing-flock
<a href="/about/people/simon-brown">Simon Brown</a><div class="field field-name-field-blog-type field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/blogs/wall-of-separation">Wall of Separation</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-callout field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">As church political activity becomes more common, an increasing number of Catholic parishioners are saying they are turned off by pulpit politics.</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="prose"><p>Are members of the Catholic hierarchy saying one thing and doing another when it comes to partisan politics?</p><p>In a document outlining “political responsibility” that was adopted by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops in 2007, <a href="http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/faithful-citizenship/upload/forming-consciences-for-faithful-citizenship.pdf">the bishops declared</a> that the church is “involved in the political process but is not partisan” and “cannot champion any candidate.”</p><p>That’s the way the church should operate, of course, as required by federal law, which bars tax-exempt organizations from campaign intervention.</p><p>But fast forward to 2012, and it’s clear that some members of the church leadership have been ignoring the church’s official stance.</p><p>This month, Americans United reported two Catholic churches to the IRS because they took clear-cut stands on political candidates.</p><p>The New York City-based Church of Saint Catherine of Siena’s Sept. 2 bulletin <a href="http://www.au.org/media/press-releases/americans-united-asks-irs-to-investigate-nyc-church-that-endorsed-romney-in-its">contained a column by the Rev. John Farren</a>, a member of the congregation’s pastoral staff. In it, he quoted former U.S. ambassadors to the Vatican who said: “We urge our fellow Catholics, and indeed all people of good will, to join with us in this full-hearted effort to elect Governor Mitt Romney as the next President of the United States.”</p><p>AU <a href="http://www.au.org/media/press-releases/americans-united-asks-irs-to-investigate-el-paso-church-that-urged-parishioners">reported another church</a> that issued a similar statement one month earlier. St. Raphael Catholic Church in El Paso, Texas, ran a notice in a church bulletin dated Aug. 5 that read, “I am asking all of you to go to the polls and be united in replacing our present president with a president that will respect the Catholic Church in this country. Please pass this on to all of your Catholic friends.”</p><p>Although the Diocese of El Paso later admitted that St. Raphael had gone too far and asked that the political statement be retracted (and the church complied), it’s clear that many in the Catholic hierarchy are anything but non-partisan this election season.</p><p>These two incidents, remember, come less than four months after Peoria Bishop Daniel R. Jenky <a href="http://www.au.org/media/press-releases/irs-should-investigate-catholic-diocese-for-illegal-election-intervention-says">notoriously compared Barack Obama to Hitler and Stalin</a> and urged parishioners to “vote their Catholic consciences” to keep church schools, hospitals and other ministries from being shut down.</p><p>As this sort of political activity becomes more common, however, an increasing number of Catholic parishioners are saying they are turned off by pulpit politics.</p><p>As Scott Alessi <a href="http://www.uscatholic.org/blog/2012/09/walking-fine-line-between-faithful-witness-and-partisan-politics">observed yesterday</a> in a blog post for <em>U.S. Catholic</em>, “As Election Day gets closer, it is getting more and more difficult for the Catholic Church to convince Americans that it is not involved in partisan politics.”</p><p>Alessi reported that a survey conducted by the magazine of 600 mass-goers indicated that “people in the pews are clearly growing tired of the partisan approach.”</p><p>A report released in February by the Pew Forum on Religion &amp; Public Life <a href="http://www.people-press.org/2012/02/27/public-views-of-the-divide-between-religion-and-politics/">backed up <em>U.S. Catholic</em>’s findings</a>. In 2010, 56 percent of white Catholics said churches should stay out of politics.</p><p>It looks like once again the Catholic hierarchy is out of touch with its flock. As Alessi noted, some mass-goers have even walked out during sermons in which priests told their parishioners how to vote.</p><p>If those partisan prelates and priests aren’t careful, they may soon have a lot in common with Clint Eastwood – they’ll be <a href="http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/08/31/13591223-clint-eastwoods-empty-chair-at-rnc-sparks-internet-buzz?lite">ranting to empty chairs</a>.</p></div></div><div class="tags clearfix"><div class="field-label">Issues:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><span class="field-item"><a href="/issues/religious-groups%E2%80%99-involvement-in-candidate-elections">Religious Groups’ Involvement in Candidate Elections</a></span></div></div><div class="tags clearfix"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/us-conference-catholic-bishops">U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/scott-alessi">Scott Alessi</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/pew-forum-religion-and-public-life">Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/daniel-r-jenky">Daniel R. Jenky</a></span></div></div>Wed, 12 Sep 2012 16:33:03 +0000Simon Brown7537 at https://au.orghttps://au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/pew-ado-catholic-leaders-endorse-candidates-despite-growing-flock#comments